Jan 20, 2003
Jan 13, 2003
Jan 8, 2003
Dec 30, 2003
Dec 24, 2003
Dec 16, 2003
 Dec 3, 2003
Nov. 11, 2003
Nov. 4, 2003
 Oct. 22, 2003
Sept 30, 2003
Sept 23, 2003
 Sept 15, 2003
Sept 2, 2003
August 5, 2003
July 29, 2003
 July 22, 2003
July 8, 2003
 June 24, 2003
June 3, 2003
May 27, 2003
May 20, 2003
May 13, 2003
April 8, 2003
March 31, 2003
March 23, 2003
March 18, 2003
March 11, 2003
ShoWest Wrapup
ShoWest 2003
March 4, 2003
February 25, 2003
February 18, 2003
February 11, 2003
February 4, 2003
January 28, 2003
January 21, 2003
January 14, 2003
January 8, 2003
January 1, 2003


..Gary Dretzka
..Noah Forrest
..Leonard Klady
..R.J. Matson
..David Poland
..Douglas Pratt
..Ray Pride
..Michael Wilmington



In one of those half-baked decisions that must have seemed like a good idea at the time, Fox Searchlight elected to preview a longer-than-usual snippet of The Dreamers as part of its product reel at last year's ShoWest. Not much was really known about Bernardo Bertolucci's return to Paris, this time amid the tumult of the late '60s, but any new work by the director of Last Tango in Paris, The Conformist and The Last Emperor was reason for cheer.

In a surprise departure from standard procedure, the president of distribution for Fox Searchlight took the podium ahead of the presentation to warn exhibitors that they were about to be shown sexually explicit footage from the film. He politely asked that all children and any audience members offended by nudity exit the banquet hall of the Paris Hotel during the brief blackout that would precede that final clip. And, sure enough, the material was as steamy as advertised.

It's hard to imagine what kind of reaction Fox Searchlight's Stephen Gilula - or, more to the point, its parent company -- expected from the theater owners. Many of the exhibitors wouldn't know Bernardo Bertolluci from Bluto Blutarsky, and, even if they did, most were contractually prohibited from offering such sexually explicit fare on their screens. The response to what amounted to a sampler of the naughty bits from The Dreamers was pretty underwhelming, if only because the combination of full-frontal nudity and rubber chicken doesn't tend to sit well with a mixed audience of mostly middle-class Americans and Canadians.

There was some polite applause, to be sure … and no one seemed openly offended. But, by and large, the exhibitors reacted as if Hollywood had thrown them yet another hot potato, and it had landed squarely in their laps. No one with any knowledge of the inner workings of the ratings board could have doubted that this version of The Dreamers would arrive in theaters with anything less than an NC-17, and it would test Fox's pledge to the MPAA not to release restricted products.

The same thing had happened two years earlier, when Warner Bros. offered the exhibitors a sneak peak of Eyes Wide Shut, only days after news of Stanley Kubrick's untimely death stunned the entertainment world. What they saw was about three minutes worth of Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman - she, in the altogether - accompanied by Chris Isaak's pulsating "Baby Did a Bad Thing". Far from whetting their appetites for the final episode in the great director's creative life, the snippet appeared to scare the crap out of most of those in attendance.

And who could blame them? Given the choice between a potentially controversial R-rated art film and American Pie 4: American Divorce, they'd opt for the one with the scenes of young men masturbating into wood any day of the week. At least, they knew there would be an audience for such bawdy material, and Universal would be happy to save the really raunchy stuff for the DVD.

If they could have anticipated how badly Warners would handle the marketing and spin on Eyes Wide Shut - and clumsily protect its R-rating, by digitally blocking out anything that might offend the prudes in the ratings board - the exhibitors probably would have started a food fight right there and then. Sadly, Kubrick wasn't around to confirm or deny the studio's later assertion that he would have approved of the ham-handed editing, which ensured the picture's launch on 2,400 screens.

The Dreamers won't open on 2,400 screens. It may never play on 2,400 screens. Instead, Searchlight will take a more traditional route to niche success, by first launching in New York and Los Angeles, and praying for good reviews and better buzz, before platforming it out to the boonies.

Blessedly, too, Searchlight has mustered the gumption to release The Dreamers uncut, making it the first major-studio film since 1997's Bent to be released with an NC-17. As late as two weeks ago, it was widely assumed that Fox had ordered Searchlight to re-cut the film for its debut at the Sundance Film Festival, and subsequent general release. However, Searchlight president Peter Rice would surprise everyone with this announcement:

"We believe that NC-17 is the appropriate rating for 'The Dreamers' given that this is not a film for children under 17; it is an audacious and original film for intelligent critics and discerning adult audiences." In the same statement, Bertolucci himself was quoted as saying: "I'm relieved -- in so many ways -- that the distributor has had the vision to release my original film. After all, an orgasm is better than a bomb."

That decision, though, pretty much assures the film will be relegated to art houses and theaters not attached to malls. In cities where only a limited number of screens are devoted to indie, documentary and foreign product - an increasingly competitive business in itself --such a perceived stigma could mean local audiences won't get a chance to see The Dreamers at all.

Then, too, the NC-17 debate means most of the early press will focus intensely on the generous displays of nudity, insinuations of incest and other scenes of debauched behavior among three young college students - one suburban American boy, the others a twin brother and sister of bourgeois French and British background - whose love for cinema unites them. Outside of a few glamour shots of the extremely attractive principals in the glossy magazines, the public face of The Dreamers will be the controversy, not the artistry on display. (Bertolucci suffered a recurrence of back problems and had to skip the L.A. press day.)

Having just seen the finished product, I applaud Searchlight's decision, as well as Bertolucci's well-publicized criticism of Fox's earlier plans to re-cut his film. I'm not in the business of reviewing movies, and won't attempt to do so in this space.

What I will say, though, is that I admired the film a great deal, and was deeply moved by the performances. Although it was set in streets of Paris during the uprising of 1968, The Dreamers transported me back to the same period in my life, a few thousand miles removed from the Sorbonne, at the similarly enflamed University of Wisconsin-Madison. Moreover, it described a time when being a film buff meant suffering through scratched 16mm prints of acknowledged classics and obscure gems, as well as white-on-white subtitles (thank you, Mr. Bergman), wretched furniture, pock-marked screens and insufferable cineastes who mumbled, groaned and sighed when moved by something they'd seen. Bertolucci's soundtrack was dead-on, as well.

Yes, there was sex, and it was of the explicit variety … no penetration, just in case you're wondering. Shocking, perhaps, but nothing remotely scandalous. Newcomer Eva Green's body is a force of nature, while Michael Pitt and Louis Garrel are real cutie-pies, as well. But, there is a lot more going on artistically and emotionally than would be indicated by the material displayed at ShoWest. In addition to being graphically rendered, the sex scenes were alternately romantic, creepy, comic, horrific, tragic, erotic and beside the point.

The movie won't win all critical hearts - based on its Venice screening, the trades already have weighed in with dismissive reviews - and it certainly won't appeal to all audiences.

While the controversy over the rating will dominate the preview coverage in the media, I doubt it will inspire many kids to try to sneak into theaters in which The Dreamers is showing. Fact is, the period storyline won't appeal to any but the most sophisticated of teenagers, and, as such, it's unlikely to scar them. The nudity won't shock anyone with a TV equipped to pick up HBO's Real Sex documentaries and Showtime's The L Word, Queer as Folk and Family Business.

Still, it's probably a far better idea for kids to wait until they're 17 to consider seeing The Dreamers, either that or attend with a parent (as proscribed by an R). Being branded with the MPAA's dreaded NC-17 rating is of concern primarily for the cooling effect it will have on any commercial aspirations Searchlight might harbor. Jack Valenti may shift the blame onto landlords, exhibitors and newspapers all he wants, but the cold reality is that the imposition of the MPAA's scarlet letters carries significant negative weight.

Among other things, it means that some theaters will not be able to exhibit the film - even if the owners wanted to - and some newspapers still won't carry the ads (although, considering the state of the industry, this appears to be an increasingly empty threat). It does seem odd that a newspaper's critic generally will be free to praise or trash a NC-17 picture to the limits of his or her vocabulary, while a display ad for the same title will somehow be seen as subversive.

If film buffs in even one under-screened market are denied the opportunity to sample a film of their choice -- strictly for the sin of it being rated NC-17 - they should consider suing the MPAA for providing the ammunition necessary for other parties to trample on their rights. One shouldn't have to wait for a controversial movie to arrive in DVD before they can join their fellow Americans in judging it for themselves. And, thanks to Blockbuster and other chains with restrictive policies, they might have a difficult time finding a copy even then. (Hint: try Netflix or Facets Multimedia.)

I'm old enough to remember when all manner of mainstream moviegoers - including rough-and-ready teenage boys in my working-class hometown - flocked to art houses to witness flashes of pubic hair in Blow-Up and I Am Curious (Yellow). For most, it was their first and last exposure to highbrow culture. A few in the audiences would savor the experience of seeing an intelligent film, with complex themes, and move on to other adult fare. Still others would find their thrills in such diverse titles as Last Tango, Deep Throat, and 10. Different strokes for different folks … literally.

With the advent of the video age and portable porn, those lines have largely disappeared, and these voyeurs have abandoned the art houses. Naughty late-night programming on premium cable networks further sealed the deal.

Today, the adult-entertainment industry is valued at anywhere from $8 to 14 billion. Americans not only can freely buy and rent movies made by porn legend Ron "The Hedgehog" Jeremy and the later work of Traci Lords, they can expect to see these actors pop up regularly in mainstream movies, TV sitcoms and "action hours." God bless 'em.
Friday, a filmmaker using the pseudonym Seymour Butts begins a second season of Showtime's reality-based cable sitcom, Family Business, while HBO's explicit documentary series Real Sex recently celebrated its 10th anniversary (absent any real marketing campaign from the network). Such erotic pastimes as fellatio, cunnilingus, anal sex, nipple and clitoral piercing are routinely discussed on sitcoms (for fun) and hour-long dramas (as occasions for sin), and fetish photography is used to sell porn-chic fashion in Vogue and Vanity Fair.

Although Pee-Wee Herman is still trying to recover from his encounter with the sex police, appearances in homemade sex flicks hasn't appreciably damaged the careers of Paris Hilton and Pamela Anderson. If it weren't for the willingness of exotic dancers to appear as contestants on dating shows, they would have run out of female partners for all the overgrown frat boys years ago. Tune in late at night and you'll find a penis-extension infomercial starring Jeremy and Internet sex magnate Kim Chambers running alongside those produced by Ron Popeil and other telemarketers.

In the face of this critical mass of adult entertainment, it seems more than a little bit quixotic for the MPAA to insist on defending Americans from their collective libido by endorsing economic sanctions on genitalia … even it is French. If the organization can't convince exhibitors and their landlords that it's in their best interests to at least consider opening their screens to all serious cinematic products, then it ought to eliminate its NC-17 rating entirely and adopt a system that doesn't penalize filmmakers who use sex, instead of cutlery and pyrotechnics, to advance their stories.

Better that than the studio-imposed censorship of Eyes Wide Shut, and what could have happened to The Dreamers.

- by Gary Dretzka

January 29, 2004


Home | Movie City News | Contact Us
Report broken links and other web problems to Webmaster
©2008. Movie City News, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Movie City Indie and MCG are trademarks of Movie City News.